Don’t forget to get your fortnight’s dose of skepticism right here, as The Unincredible Hallq serves up the latest Meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle. It’s another tasty concoction of skepticism, critical thinking, and science.

Next up on July 2 will be a newcomer and first time host, Homologous Legs. If you’re a blogger with a skeptical bent, start sharpening your pencils (metaphorically speaking, of course–who uses pencils to blog?), and be sure to send your best stuff for the 114th Meeting of the Skeptics’ Circle. Then join us here two weeks hence!

Comments

You people never change Orac. Everytime I talk to people like you, the exact same events happen.

I just got back from my blog. There was a warning message on it saying people complained.

I have used that blog for years with no problems. I come here and comment for 1 or maybe 2 weeks, and suddenly my blog has trouble. Obviously the gang of thugs here that call themselves scientists, have decided that verbal aggression and abuse is not enough.

Some part of the gang of people who read your blog have decided to see if they can get my work censored and/or removed from a public blog network.

As if refusing to engage me in intellectual discourse after your unwarranted attack on my work was not slimy enough, you and your gang actually try to stamp out information useful to humanity to satisfy your petty need to get at me.

Along with the attempt to have my blog closed, the computer has been under attack for the past 5 days. Something that has not happened in years.

Not only does some part of your gang try to get my blog closed down, they also try to attack my computer in an attempt to do what can only be something nefarious.

How can you countenance such actions Orac? Whether you know about it or not, none of it happened until I began to post on your blog. If it is not with your consent or at your instruction, one of your gang must think you would consent to such actions and they are acting on your behalf.

I think you should post a public message saying that you do not condone any of your followers attacking people who post differing opinions on your blog. If you don’t post one, then you are condoning their actions by your silence.

Happeh, I think you need to realize that by posting here, you almost certainly exposed your blog to more than double the people that saw it before. You don’t get complaints when maybe three people have seen it.

Also, there is absolutely no way for anyone here to get the information necessary to “attack” your computer. You are most likely seeing a coincidental event and assuming it must have a common cause.

I have used that blog for years with no problems. I come here and comment for 1 or maybe 2 weeks, and suddenly my blog has trouble. Obviously the gang of thugs here that call themselves scientists, have decided that verbal aggression and abuse is not enough.

Some part of the gang of people who read your blog have decided to see if they can get my work censored and/or removed from a public blog network.

As if refusing to engage me in intellectual discourse after your unwarranted attack on my work was not slimy enough, you and your gang actually try to stamp out information useful to humanity to satisfy your petty need to get at me.

Happeh, give me a break. I neither encourage nor condone harassment. Moreover, it’s been over two and a half months since I did my light-hearted satirical bit about your amazingly woo-filled (and wank-obsessed) website, which, as many have pointed out, is so bizarre and over-the-top that many have a hard time believing it’s not a parody. Recently, over the last month or so, you’ve made an utter pest of yourself in the comments. Oh, your nonsense was amusing at first, but it’s become so persistent and annoying that it no longer amuses me, and, I daresay, no longer amuses most of my readers (if it ever amused them in the first place).

You contribute nothing of value to the conversation here, at least not unless you count being a convenient target for ridicule.

If you do a google search of your blog for “Content warning”, you’ll see that the one hit is your explanation of the “buck-teeth and coke-bottle glasses” stereotype of the Chinese. Probably what happened was someone (perhaps from here) found your view of the Chinese to be offensive and racist, even though it made the Chinese out to be smart and white people out to be dumb, rather than the other way around. I mean, I know that at least one reader of this blog found your “Asians are smart and have super-powers, while white people are stupid cripples” blurb to be racist against Asians.

[re-posted without links in an attempt to escape the spam-filter (which, by the way, had only one link; what triggered it?)]

@Happeh:

If you do a Google search of your “Secrets of Life” for the string “content warning”, you’ll see that the only hit is your article on your hypothesis on the origin of the “coke-bottle glasses and buck-teeth” stereotype of Chinese people. Someone probably found it to be racist against Chinese, even though it portrays them as smart, like someone on this blog found your “Asians have no autistic children because they understand the Yin Yang Theory” comment to be racist, even though it said nothing negative about Asians.